Tx for jogging my memory. It was really bugging me, I knew I had read it somewhere. It just goes to show what a great education and learning resource Cryptome is. A must for all secrecy buffs and aspiring spies and historians...long may it continue...;-)
ATB Dougie. On 28/06/14 00:44, John Young wrote:
Footnote to the CIA Battle for Iran re-release. In 2000 NY Times published a longer account of the Mossedeq overthow which was amply redacted, but redacted by a means which could be easily reversed, which we discovered by accident. We removed the redactions and published the report despite NY Times' plea to not do it (we informed the paper beforehand). http://cryptome.org/cia-iran.htm<http://cryptome.org/cia-iran.htm>Later the Times redid the redactions by a more secure meansand that is the version still offered by the paper. National Security Archive has brief mention of this event but does not name Cryptome, merely says it was done by the "Web," nor point to our version, instead points to the NY Times'. So like the Snowden releases, the USG still considers Ed's disclosures classified and they may not be cited in official documents. Though officials read them avidly to complain about harm to the nation. Kind of like Doug's report on BBC monitoring: layers of access for the privileged, the least access by those who pay for the official secrecy done to protect the foolish but not protect from officials and their craven cohorts.